New York AG Letitia James says T-Mobile merger commitments don’t address antitrust violations


T-Mobile has made a few big announcements recently that are tied to its proposed merger with Sprint, but according to one of the state attorneys general leading the lawsuit to block the merger, those commitments aren’t enough.

During a press conference today related to a lawsuit against vape company Juul, New York Attorney General Letitia James was asked about T-Mobile’s recent promise to make investments in the state and whether it could lead to an agreement between T-Mo and James. The New York AG was the one to announce the lawsuit against T-Mobile and Sprint’s merger and is one of its key participants.

In response to the question, James says that T-Mobile’s promises do not address the concerns that the group of state AGs have with the proposed merger. “Our case against T-Mobile is an antitrust violation, obviously we’re concerned with anti-competitive behavior,” James explains. “So providing public benefits are good, but it does not address the antitrust violations.”

T-Mobile said last week that if its merger with Sprint is completed, it will build a Customer Experience Center in New York’s Nassau County. The carrier claims that this customer support facility will create up to 1,000 local jobs and that the buildout of the site will help create indirect jobs in areas like construction.

In addition to its pledge to create five Customer Experience centers in total if the Sprint merger is allowed to happen, T-Mo recently announced three New T-Mobile Un-carrier 1.0 moves that it will make if the merger is completed. Those include free service for first responders, free internet access for eligible families to help students do schoolwork, and a low-cost rate plan that’ll include unlimited talk and text as well as 2GB of data for $15 per month.

The trial for the state AGs’ lawsuit is set to begin on December 9th.

Source: Facebook

Tags: , , , ,

  • Albert Orange

    What a dumb bitch!

    • Reagan1

      This is what happens when you try and placate a leftist hack like Letitia…TMO should know this.

      • marque2

        They should rescind all their offers if the DA goes through with the suit.

      • Jose Mendoza

        lol she’s a corporatist like the rest of them
        If T-Mobile maybe stays at one of her properties, maybe then she’ll drop the case lol

        • Reagan1

          She’s too stupid to own/run properties and hardly a “corporatist”, more like a Marxist. Just another teet sucker off hard working, NY taxpayers.

    • riverhorse

      She knows exactly what she’s doing. Now, her hippie / Black Panther parents were dumb.

  • Keith

    What does she want? Free service to all government employees, and all those on government assistance, and Sr. Citizens, orphans, children, students, divorcees, all protected classes. Anyone else?

    • riverhorse

      She has future aims for higher office, and this will be one of her campaign bona fides.

  • pmichos

    This is a mafia style shake down by the state AG.

  • randian

    What violations? This is nothing but extortion.

  • bjc2be11

    Hello all with all due respect to all here. I love T-Mobile and I find John Legere fascinating. I have been very excited about the merger, but there are questions here. What happens when the dust settles after it goes through. Promises were made, will they be kept. Will the lower prices kill competition. Let’s use dish as an example. Can it compete with 15.00 month? If that goes belly up along with straight talk plans, will the pricing then rise? Since John is leaving is accountability limited, do the promises go to the waste side? In my opinion look at att time warner and direct tv, I seem to recall promises of lower pricing. Now that the dust has settled use direct tv now as an example, it has raised pricing twice this year after the lower pricing was suppose to happen. With this “Lower pricing” maybe the others have been able to lower their prices on services oh wait I don’t remover reading that. Just an example. However California is in this lawsuit to help the consumer to I think. However we will have a cheaper cell phone plan but not fight companies like in my opinion greystar from buying up the apartments and attempting to raise pricing so much that living is unaffordable. I can afford to call someone but I may not be able to live outside of a refrigerator box. Sorry for the rant just a thought

    • riverhorse

      Some folks lie, some don’t. I wouldn’t expect someone who hasn’t lied over many years thru the lean times, to lie now.

    • Shaun Michalak

      While your comment does have some merit.. There are things that you are not taking into account.. Like with Direct TV.. Was it “their” costs that prices went up, or was it because they just passed along the buck, and the prices for the channels went up, so the extra charges from the TV stations was passed along to you..

      As for T-Mobile.. Can they compete with $15.. Why not?? You have to remember. You only get 2 gigs of data on that plan, and most people want more then that. Not only that, but there are places like Mint Mobile that offer plans like that right now.. So I do not see this being a huge change. Most people will stick with unlimited plans, and they never said anything about lowering the prices of those plans.

      ” With this “Lower pricing” maybe the others have been able to lower
      their prices on services oh wait I don’t remover reading that.”

      There is no way for any company to even guess what another company is going to do, so why would they comment on it?? I will say this though. Right now, AT&T prepaid is offering a $25 plan with 8 gigs of data, when you pay for it by the year. T-Mobiles $25 plan only has 5 gigs that they are going to offer.. Also, recently, Verizon started up their own prepaid version called Visible.. So I would think that AT&T, and the other companies have taken notice..

      • vrm

        t-mobile MADE unlimited plans. Before that, only the rich could afford them. And if others offer affordable plans then great- t-mobile possibly can’t take them away, can they ?

        • Shaun Michalak

          Not once it is in place.. T-Mobile will keep the pricing for the plan that you signed up with, including all its details.. The only thing that they will change is if they add to it.. Like maybe giving you 5 gigs of data instead of 2.. Other then that, you stay with its details.. The bad part of that is, if they come out with a better plan, you have to personally change it to the better plan to get the better price.. But as you say, you stick with the plan/price that you got.

    • vrm

      CA has the most corrupt govt anywhere, even more so than NY or NJ. The crooked governors keep touting global warming while burning millions of acres of forest every year. That causes more “warming” than ANYTHING else we know by a factor of 100. On top of that, he loots tax payers for “emergency” funds ! And don’t forget trains to nowhere, free college and h/c for illegals, free sanctuary for illegals and so on… NOBODY in CA should have a say in making ANY decision on ANYTHING.

  • Jason Bell

    Damn I can’t stand that bitch!!! She is the one who started all of this pure BS!! Let me guess, she must use Verizon or ATT for her cell service. Anyone want to make a wager on that???

    • Deadeye37

      she must be sponsored by Verizon or ATT.

      Fixed that for you. :)

    • vrm

      She’s just another corrupt democrat, willing to use her power for extortion.

  • Jay Holm

    Screw this twit, she doesn’t work for the DOJ, antitrust issues are for the DOJ, and the DOJ alone to address!!!!

    • David

      Legally, Congress passed the Tunney Act specifically to allow challenges do DOJ rulings of Antitrust in 1974. So the suit is more or less a challenge of the DOJ ruling referred to. You are therefore correct that antitrust issues are for the DOJ, however in saying the DOJ alone you are incorrect as Congress has given power to the Court’s to review the Decisions that the DOJ make under Sherman (which congress passed and delegated enforcement to the DOJ).

  • Shaun Michalak

    If this went to court, and they had to fight it there to get the merger, I would take back the part about opening a call center in NY.. After all, they are offering it trying to please everyone.. But if they do not want to accept any offers, then remove the offer if you have to go to court to get things done..

    I think what really gets me about these people is the fact that they basically are working on a double edge sword.. They have no problem with the merger if Dish was in place, but if Dish has nothing to start off with, then there is no way to succeed.. It is like they want T-Mobile to wait for Dish, and they want Dish to put up a whole network, and pay for it, before they will agree to the terms.. Problem is, Dish can not afford to put up the network like that with no guarantees of customers or income, and nothing can be said that would assure these people that Dish will go through with it until then. and even if Dish did do that, then they would say that now there is less competition because they went from 5 to 4 carriers because Sprint is no longer there, and Dish took them over. It is a no win situation with these people.

    • vrm

      we don’t want no amazon jobs, we don’t want no t-mobile jobs. t-mobile wants to kill jobs.

      I’d like to say this woman is the most corrupt prosecutor in the country but almost any democrat who is a prosecutor or judge is equally corrupt. We’ve see in Chicago in the Smollett case. Then we see how Kim Gardiner went after republicans in Missouri using frivolous excuses. And how successive AGs in NY have gone after the POTUS, including this corrupt woman, while they ignore blatant corruption by DeBlasio and even the Clinton foundation.

      • TBN27

        The problem is that amazon was basically going to not pay taxes and where they were going to set up shop, was gonna drive up cost of living which has already gotten expensive already with the gentrification. Secondly, the promises that they said were going to be empty; everyone in the area will not benefit from this in terms of employment like that said if you take Seattle as an example. Deblasio whom you’d say is corrupt was for amazon coming to NYC. So if you think deblasio is corrupt then so is amazon and it’s good they never were to get to do their damage. Only big business that stick to their word are allowed.

  • Gaius_Baltar4

    How exactly does the merger violate anti trust law? How? Can someone explain that?

    I get that you may not LIKE the merger and you would prefer Sprint to be stand alone but if we have for example Company A,B,C, and D.

    Then C buys D and is still SMALLER than A and B how is that anti competitive?

    T-Mobile will still have the SMALLEST market share post merger and that violates anti trust law? Having the SMALLEST market share in your industry is anti competitive? Really?

    Yet these guys don’t want to break up Verizon and AT&T into smaller carriers. Funny how that works.

    • David

      The test under U.S. law is price and “consumer harm”. It’s what makes Google and Facebook get away with all their acquisitions, they offer a free service. They would still have the smallest market share but the burden the court would address is if a cost analysis was done. More so, I have heard from reporting from the verge that there were emails that they (TMobile) needed the merger to raise prices. So hopefully that helps, in the U.S. the only test that matters is consumer harm as a metric of price.

  • Blink8533

    Everything you said it’s true! Thank AOC for the last one.